Legal Opinion

Franck v. McGilvray

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 24, 1906No. Docket No. 100PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Manistee; Rose, J. Assumpsit by Lauritz S. Eranck against Jennie Mc-Gilvray and Blanche Baker for work and labor. There was judgment for defendants on a verdict directed by the court, and plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, C. J.

Plaintiff brought this suit to recover for services rendered and expenditures made in clearing up the title to a piece of land owned by defendants. The trial court directed a verdict for defendants on the ground that they were under no obligation to pay for the services and expenditures sued for. Plaintiff asks *319us to reverse the judgment entered on said verdict. The sole question in this case is whether there was any contract between plaintiff and defendants. As all the dealings between the parties took place by correspondence, the proper construction of that correspondence will determine…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. McCain v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Grand Rapids Terminal Belt Railway Co. v. WatersMichigan Supreme Court · 1917

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API